[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <hlnvrmxos77rw4fftwnyg6q2sfjgvx4vlzdvyuf7kwiuamcvpa@llfuqlijev6t>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 17:44:27 +0800
From: Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@...il.com>
Cc: Chen Wang <unicorn_wang@...look.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@...look.com>, Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>, Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>, Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>, Longbin Li <looong.bin@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 1/3] dt-bindings: net: Add support for
Sophgo SG2044 dwmac
On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 08:51:11AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 09:43:25AM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote:
> > The GMAC IP on SG2044 is almost a standard Synopsys DesignWare
> > MAC (version 5.30a) with some extra clock.
> >
> > Add necessary compatible string for this device.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@...il.com>
> > ---
> > .../devicetree/bindings/net/snps,dwmac.yaml | 4 +
> > .../bindings/net/sophgo,sg2044-dwmac.yaml | 124 ++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 128 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/sophgo,sg2044-dwmac.yaml
> >
>
> I wish patches for review were not marked as RFC. I remember this
> patch, so I don't consider this as RFC... but that's rather exception.
>
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Sorry for the change to RFC. I was told to switch to RFC as it
has a unmerged dependency since v2. Thanks for your review tag
and apology for the confusion.
Regards,
Inochi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists